486 réponses à ce sujet

[Chashan]

wright1978 wrote...

No its just technology. Just because it was built by the reapers doesn't mean each relay is a sentient AI. Just because it was built by the reapers doesn't mean it should be targetted by the weapon. The geth/EDI reaper code thing could have been plausible( in that their intelligence is indistinguishable from reapers) but that's not the angle they took.

I don't mind dropping the 'reaper-technology' bit as a criterion altogether, as that's just plain awkward all-around. In regards to 'code' as well, as was brought up before. It being affected due to it serving as the carrier-mechanism for the 'pulse' makes a good deal more sense to me, however.

It overloads in the process, and thus ends up beyond repair. Simple, really.

[Reorte]

RatThing wrote...

It's reaper technology. Somehow the beam needs to distinguish what's a Reaper that must be destroyed and what's not. The fact that it doesn't do a perfect job here wouldn't be that illogical for me. Same with Edi and the Geth who are carrying Reaper code. Also, the way I've interpreted the ending, the relays were needed to spread the crucible's energy and simply overloaded (couldn't take that much energy).

Just saying "Reaper technology" doesn't work - look at all the human technology, from waterwheels to computers. For the beam to work it'll either have to be just a brute force blunt instrument, that would destroy everything in its path, or tuned to something very precise.

The Reaper code part is even worse. Without any hardware changes to the geth the beam would somehow have to analyse the software running on all sorts of different hardware and determine whether or not it's been tinkered with by the Reapers or not.

[Reorte]

Chashan wrote...

It overloads in the process, and thus ends up beyond repair. Simple, really.

Why would it do that? Flinging information to other relays sounds a lot less demanding than flinging entire fleets around, and the beam isn't a brute force "trash everything from overwhelming amounts of energy" transmission.

[TheProtheans]

As I said before EC and MEHEM are just as valid as eachother as DLC, the major different that MEHEM isn't available on the console.
And EC and MEHEM are just as valid as the original endings for the most part considering it is almost impossible to continue the story taking the players actions into account without retconning and nullifying them.


The question is really if a second source can be as legit as Bioware's content, for the most part I would never use a second source and I only stick to the official.
However Mass effect is an exception and well the incompetence of some it's writers warrants using a more intelligently made second source.
At this point the "official" story of Mass effect has lost my attention, it once had me holding on tight.



On a side note: There is only two views of Synthesis, Disney ending or Horrfying.

Modifié par TheProtheans, 19 octobre 2013 - 12:04 .

[Chashan]

Reorte wrote...

Chashan wrote...

It overloads in the process, and thus ends up beyond repair. Simple, really.

Why would it do that? Flinging information to other relays sounds a lot less demanding than flinging entire fleets around, and the beam isn't a brute force "trash everything from overwhelming amounts of energy" transmission.

Low-EMS wave shows it to be pretty much that, though. Hence why I suggested collateral damage be worked into Red as an unavoidable consequence, more constrained the more intact the Wunderwaffe is.

[GreyLycanTrope]

David7204 wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

Though, to clarify: I'm not saying MEHEM was the ending I wanted. I've never tried it. The Disney crap is just a worn nerve. Ask for a modicum of satisfaction and people say you're gunning to turn Mass Effect into My Little Pony and your desires are somehow ruinous to the integrity of BioWare games.

That is exactly what MEHEM offers. That is it's sole and explicit purpose. To offer a warm and fuzzies ending with no attempt to address other issues.

If people didn't see the appeal of that, they wouldn't be using the mod the first place.

Now, does that mean they 'want' such a thing in the actual game? Of course not. But that's not because we're underestimating the merit of MEHEM. Because we aren't. It simply means the people who claim they 'want' such a thing in the main game are deep enough in their hypocrisy to accept such a delusion.

MEHEM is not a good ending. It's not good writing. Of course, neither are the original endings, but that's aside the point. It's warm and fuzzies and that's all it is.

David pls. While it adds more closure for characters it also removes glowboy(which in itself removes several issues) the only thing it doesn't account for is the Crucible being a giant I win button.  The appeal consists of two part, no catalyst and a reunion scene.

Modifié par Greylycantrope, 19 octobre 2013 - 12:42 .

[GimmeDaGun]

I don't give a damn about MEHEM. I don't like it so I would never install it. That's it. Those who lik it, good for them, let them enjoy it. I don't mind. Just as I don't care what others think about me liking the ending. That's my business, and while I gladly listened to their opinions, it never convinced me. I'm tired of the ending crap anyway.

[RatThing]

wright1978 wrote...

RatThing wrote...

It's reaper technology. Somehow the beam needs to distinguish what's a Reaper that must be destroyed and what's not. The fact that it doesn't do a perfect job here wouldn't be that illogical for me. Same with Edi and the Geth who are carrying Reaper code. Also, the way I've interpreted the ending, the relays were needed to spread the crucible's energy and simply overloaded (couldn't take that much energy).

No its just technology. Just because it was built by the reapers doesn't mean each relay is a sentient AI. Just because it was built by the reapers doesn't mean it should be targetted by the weapon. The geth/EDI reaper code thing could have been plausible( in that their intelligence is indistinguishable from reapers) but that's not the angle they took.

I'm not saying that this is the explanation, I'm saying this explanation could have been delivered (and would have been more or less plausible IMO). Like finding some similar parts in every Reaper built device and let the beam target exactly those. It's a completely different "civilization" no doubt that their technology would differ from ours. It could contain some Reaper code chunks without actually be a sentient AI too.

[Reorte]

RatThing wrote...

I'm not saying that this is the explanation, I'm saying this explanation could have been delivered (and would have been more or less plausible IMO). Like finding some similar parts in every Reaper built device and let the beam target exactly those. It's a completely different "civilization" no doubt that their technology would differ from ours. It could contain some Reaper code chunks without actually be a sentient AI too.

Why would there be similar, targettable things in all Reaper technology any more than there is in all human technology (which covers things from the wheel to the microchip)? It's reasonable enough to assume that there will be something unique to the Reapers in every Reaper, but not in every piece of Reaper technology.

The code thing I've already covered.

[Skvindt]

Ieldra2 wrote...

iakus wrote...

jtav wrote...

The destruction of all Reaper tech is a much more natural and logical consequence. But I do think there has to be something to stay the player's hand. Especially if you can both kill the Reapers and have Shep live by making the same choice.

Relay network is busted.  There are no relay specialists.  Heck it was only in the last year or so Dr Kenson was able to confirm they predated teh Protheans.  that's how little they've been studied.

I think I've asked this before, but would you have been ok with Destroy if the geth lived but the relay network was permanently destroyed? Because I think that would've been thematically appropriate, have a solid philosophical grounding in the story that came before ("The relays blind you to other possibilities") and made for an interesting and very different future. In fact, I only had a problem with this aspect in the original ending because this happened in all endings, with a little ambiguity in Control.

Supported.  I'm not totally against having the geth eradicated in destroy, but I do like this alternative better.

[crimzontearz]

Greylycantrope wrote...

David7204 wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

Though, to clarify: I'm not saying MEHEM was the ending I wanted. I've never tried it. The Disney crap is just a worn nerve. Ask for a modicum of satisfaction and people say you're gunning to turn Mass Effect into My Little Pony and your desires are somehow ruinous to the integrity of BioWare games.

That is exactly what MEHEM offers. That is it's sole and explicit purpose. To offer a warm and fuzzies ending with no attempt to address other issues.

If people didn't see the appeal of that, they wouldn't be using the mod the first place.

Now, does that mean they 'want' such a thing in the actual game? Of course not. But that's not because we're underestimating the merit of MEHEM. Because we aren't. It simply means the people who claim they 'want' such a thing in the main game are deep enough in their hypocrisy to accept such a delusion.

MEHEM is not a good ending. It's not good writing. Of course, neither are the original endings, but that's aside the point. It's warm and fuzzies and that's all it is.

David pls. While it adds more closure for characters it also removes glowboy(which in itself removes several issues) the only thing it doesn't account for is the Crucible being a giant I win button.  The appeal consists of two part, no catalyst and a reunion scene.

and we have a winner

[Iakus]

Ieldra2 wrote...

iakus wrote...

jtav wrote...

The destruction of all Reaper tech is a much more natural and logical consequence. But I do think there has to be something to stay the player's hand. Especially if you can both kill the Reapers and have Shep live by making the same choice.

Relay network is busted.  There are no relay specialists.  Heck it was only in the last year or so Dr Kenson was able to confirm they predated teh Protheans.  that's how little they've been studied.

I think I've asked this before, but would you have been ok with Destroy if the geth lived but the relay network was permanently destroyed? Because I think that would've been thematically appropriate, have a solid philosophical grounding in the story that came before ("The relays blind you to other possibilities") and made for an interesting and very different future. In fact, I only had a problem with this aspect in the original ending because this happened in all endings, with a little ambiguity in Control.

I think you have asked before, but I'm happy to reiterate.

With an unambiguous YES!!!  Provided the relays didn't nova and destroy the systems they were in, I would have been totally cool with it. To the point of even being able to live with the Breath Scene

Edit:  not that I'd find the Breath Scene very satisfying.  Just that I could live with it

Modifié par iakus, 19 octobre 2013 - 03:42 .

[Iakus]

erezike wrote...

in order for mehem to truly work. the entire scene from the moment the sucidal charge begins and to the moment shepard enters the beam need to be changed drasticly. this isnt MEHEM fault. they simply had a lot of bad working material to begin with.

Hey, at least MEHEM lets harbinger have a few lines in that scene

[RatThing]

Reorte wrote...

RatThing wrote...

I'm not saying that this is the explanation, I'm saying this explanation could have been delivered (and would have been more or less plausible IMO). Like finding some similar parts in every Reaper built device and let the beam target exactly those. It's a completely different "civilization" no doubt that their technology would differ from ours. It could contain some Reaper code chunks without actually be a sentient AI too.

Why would there be similar, targettable things in all Reaper technology any more than there is in all human technology (which covers things from the wheel to the microchip)? It's reasonable enough to assume that there will be something unique to the Reapers in every Reaper, but not in every piece of Reaper technology.

The code thing I've already covered.

This is Sci fi.  You expect me to explain a technology we don't even have in every detail? The fact that it's an entirely different civilization should suffice as an explanation for unique targetable things in their technology. I mean they combine organic and synthetic matter. If you really need an example, how about the programming language they would use. I'm pretty sure they wouldn't use the same as we even in 200 years. So, beam connects with Reaper thing, beam recognizes Reaper syntax in code used in programs (that are not necesarily AI), beam destroys. Is this really more illogical like, let's say biotics, the lazarus project or the genophage?  

(And it would be hard to find something unique in every Reaper but not in every piece of Reaper technology since I doubt too many Reaper would be available for analyzing. So it would make sence to search for "targetable things" in other Reaper technology.)

Modifié par RatThing, 19 octobre 2013 - 03:51 .

[Reorte]

RatThing wrote...

This is Sci fi.  You expect me to explain a technology we don't even have in every detail?

Yes, it's SCIENCE fiction. The "it's sci fi" cop-out is just that, a cop-out. It's not a reason for throwing in anything no matter how far-fetched. Doing so is bad science fiction and bad writing in general (once anything at all happens you've rejected all rules, which is rejecting any means of creating good drama). Good science fiction needs to remain grounded in reality, possibly subject to some early-established exceptions (such as eezo in this case).

The fact that it's an entirely different civilization should suffice as an explanation for unique targetable things in their technology.

No it shouldn't, because that's an excuse for throwing in any old nonsense.

I mean they combine organic and synthetic matter. If you really need an example, how about the programming language they would use. I'm pretty sure they wouldn't use the same as we even in 200 years. So, beam connects with Reaper thing, beam recognizes Reaper syntax in code used in programs (that are not necesarily AI), beam destroys. Is this really more illogical like, let's say biotics, the lazarus project or the genophage? 

It's no more illogical than the Lazarus Project, which is completely illogical. Biotics is part of the established setting up the universe stuff. Don't see what's so illogical about the genophage. But "beam recognizes Reaper syntax in code used in programs"? That's face-palming territory. How is a beam supposed to do that?

(And it would be hard to find something unique in every Reaper but not in every piece of Reaper technology since I doubt too many Reaper would be available for analyzing. So it would make sence to search for "targetable things" in other Reaper technology.)

But it's implausible that they would exist. For example, in a soft science fiction setting I might just about be able to suspend disbelief for a device that makes all cars break down, but not one that says "Hey, we've found an exhaust pipe, that gives us some insight that can help us make a beam that'll break anything containing car technology!"

[Splinter Cell 108]

Ieldra2 wrote...

I think I've asked this before, but would you have been ok with Destroy if the geth lived but the relay network was permanently destroyed? Because I think that would've been thematically appropriate, have a solid philosophical grounding in the story that came before ("The relays blind you to other possibilities") and made for an interesting and very different future. In fact, I only had a problem with this aspect in the original ending because this happened in all endings, with a little ambiguity in Control.

I wouldn't be alright with this. I would be alright with an ending in which the Catalyst is gone and so are Control and Synthesis. They void anything that the last two games were about, there's no way ME1 makes sense with the catralyst. Why didn't it just allow Sovereign to open the Citadel Relay? Why even wait until Sovereign gets there? Synthesis and Control? I don't think I can have any ending were the Reapers are still alive, there's no assurance that they just won't turn later on. 

To be perfectly clear,  I'm not all that conflicted with EDI and the Geth having to go in destroy, neither would I have been conflicted with a dark, bittersweet, etc ending, that's fine by me, it just needed to be done right, which it wasn't. The endings just don't make any kind of sense, and leave a lot of loose ends, I mean really, was it so hard to say if Shepard was dead or nor? Even if they clearly had stated that he was dead, I'd have no problem with that. instead we get "breath scene" which amounted to nothing.  

[Barquiel]

Why would the Relays be permanently destroyed? Mass Relays are not space magic.

The Protheans managed to build a prototype Mass Relay and they were only slightly more advanced than the current cycle races. Aethyta implies that the asari have the capability (or at least the foundations) to make their own Mass Relays. They just didn't have the motivation to do so because the original relay network was enough for their purposes. I think it should take some time to rebuild the relay network. But destroy it permanently? That wouldn't make much sense imo.

[Iakus]

Barquiel wrote...

Why would the Relays be permanently destroyed? Mass Relays are not space magic.

The Protheans managed to build a prototype Mass Relay and they were only slightly more advanced than the current cycle races. Aethyta implies that the asari have the capability (or at least the foundations) to make their own Mass Relays. They just didn't have the motivation to do so because the original relay network was enough for their purposes. I think it should take some time to rebuild the relay network. But destroy it permanently? That wouldn't make much sense imo.

Destroying the relays does not preclude the building of new ones.  Only that the races would have to do it on their own without Reaper aid.  I'm totally okay with that, as it would show the galaxy has truly escaped the Reaper trap.

[RatThing]

Reorte wrote...

RatThing wrote...

This is Sci fi.  You expect me to explain a technology we don't even have in every detail?

Yes, it's SCIENCE fiction. The "it's sci fi" cop-out is just that, a cop-out. It's not a reason for throwing in anything no matter how far-fetched. Doing so is bad science fiction and bad writing in general (once anything at all happens you've rejected all rules, which is rejecting any means of creating good drama). Good science fiction needs to remain grounded in reality, possibly subject to some early-established exceptions (such as eezo in this case).

The fact that it's an entirely different civilization should suffice as an explanation for unique targetable things in their technology.

No it shouldn't, because that's an excuse for throwing in any old nonsense.

I mean they combine organic and synthetic matter. If you really need an example, how about the programming language they would use. I'm pretty sure they wouldn't use the same as we even in 200 years. So, beam connects with Reaper thing, beam recognizes Reaper syntax in code used in programs (that are not necesarily AI), beam destroys. Is this really more illogical like, let's say biotics, the lazarus project or the genophage? 

It's no more illogical than the Lazarus Project, which is completely illogical. Biotics is part of the established setting up the universe stuff. Don't see what's so illogical about the genophage. But "beam recognizes Reaper syntax in code used in programs"? That's face-palming territory. How is a beam supposed to do that?

Face palming territory? That's funny because since the beam already recognizes what's a Reaper it is already established that it is in a way intelligent (not AI) as it has some kind of detection ability.
I see you really expect me to explain everything in detail. How about YOU explain ME then how a beam would recoginze Reapers in the first place but leave everything else alone? And not only the big ones, also the reaper creatures which are definitely not AI, and which would differ in design and programming. 
And why it is implausible for a civilization that is billions of years without any contact to ours so far would have something unique, something recognizable. Some generalizations do not suffice here, I want proof, I want science. 

[JamesFaith]

Reorte wrote...

RatThing wrote...

This is Sci fi.  You expect me to explain a technology we don't even have in every detail?

Yes, it's SCIENCE fiction. The "it's sci fi" cop-out is just that, a cop-out. It's not a reason for throwing in anything no matter how far-fetched. Doing so is bad science fiction and bad writing in general (once anything at all happens you've rejected all rules, which is rejecting any means of creating good drama). Good science fiction needs to remain grounded in reality, possibly subject to some early-established exceptions (such as eezo in this case).

Actually what are you describing here aren't essential feature of science fiction in general, but features of subgenre called hard science fiction.

Other subgenres are in fact avoiding such explanations and often broking rules of real science, f.e. science-fantasy subgenre and others.

[Br3admax]

Barquiel wrote...

Why would the Relays be permanently destroyed? Mass Relays are not space magic.

Yes they are. They are able to lower mass with a rock and a charge. Sounds like space magic to me. 

[KaiserShep]

The relays being space magic does not preclude them from being repaired, any more than the eezo core of the Normandy being space magic did not preclude regular organics from building it.

[Reorte]

RatThing wrote...

Face palming territory? That's funny because since the beam already recognizes what's a Reaper it is already established that it is in a way intelligent (not AI) as it has some kind of detection ability.

Where has that been established? And there's no sensible mechanism for it.

I see you really expect me to explain everything in detail. How about YOU explain ME then how a beam would recoginze Reapers in the first place but leave everything else alone? And not only the big ones, also the reaper creatures which are definitely not AI, and which would differ in design and programming.

Yes, affecting husks and similar is just as daft. As for how it could just affect the Reapers there are a couple of possibilities. Since they are controlled anyway effectively ordering them to self-destruct is one. Another would be something to do with the way their larger than normal mass effect cores might be put together. Sure, that lacks detailed explanation too but doesn't require inventing completely new far-fetched ideas either. Neither of those are great but the whole Instant Reaper Dead / Controlled / Synthesised idea is fundamentally bad to begin with.

And why it is implausible for a civilization that is billions of years without any contact to ours so far would have something unique, something recognizable. Some generalizations do not suffice here, I want proof, I want science. 

So it either has to be 100% provable and scientific or absolutely anything goes?

It's implausible that every single thing they create would have some easy identifying feature in commmon. Why do you even have to ask that? As I pointed out it's like saying "This targets all human technology". What identifying feature is there of that, from the wheel to the microchip?

Modifié par Reorte, 19 octobre 2013 - 06:10 .

[Reorte]

JamesFaith wrote...

Reorte wrote...

RatThing wrote...

This is Sci fi.  You expect me to explain a technology we don't even have in every detail?

Yes, it's SCIENCE fiction. The "it's sci fi" cop-out is just that, a cop-out. It's not a reason for throwing in anything no matter how far-fetched. Doing so is bad science fiction and bad writing in general (once anything at all happens you've rejected all rules, which is rejecting any means of creating good drama). Good science fiction needs to remain grounded in reality, possibly subject to some early-established exceptions (such as eezo in this case).

Actually what are you describing here aren't essential feature of science fiction in general, but features of subgenre called hard science fiction.

Other subgenres are in fact avoiding such explanations and often broking rules of real science, f.e. science-fantasy subgenre and others.

The difference between hard science fiction and soft science fiction is that hard science fiction concentrates on the science parts and uses them as a fundamental part of its plot. Soft science fiction doesn't concentrate on them because they're not particularly relevent to the plot. Making up any old nonsense because you're stumped on how to move the story along without it is bad science fiction. The difference between soft science fiction and science fantasy is that the latter has greater freedom in setting up its universe to begin with, but they all need to be limited by the real world and their own established exceptions to it if they're to be any good.

What creates drama are characters struggling to achieve their goals and having impediments in doing so. Where's the drama if you can just pull a solution to an impediment out of your backside any time you get stuck?

[Han Shot First]

I don't hate MEHEM.

What I do find mildly annoying is it sometimes being discussed as if it was canon (rather than head canon), demands that it be made part of the official canon, or claims that the fanbase as a whole thought it was better ending than the ones created by devs. I find it equally bad, personally.